But Metro President and CEO Frank Wilson told board members Thursday, "We've stemmed the declining tide."

Wilson passed out a quarterly report that says total bus and rail ridership for the nine months through June was 6.5 percent higher than a year earlier. A footnote, however, explains that the numbers are adjusted.

Unadjusted and more recent counts show total ridership for October through July was actually down 1.5 percent, driven by a 9 percent drop in the local bus component that serves many poorer neighborhoods in the inner city — the core mission of public transit.

Jim Archer, Metro's manager of service evaluation, said the raw fiscal 2004 numbers are misleading because of two unusual events that will not be repeated: The agency cut 37 poorly performing bus routes and changed numerous others to connect better with the new light rail line and avoid duplicating service.

Related Stories

Both of these sharply reduced ridership in fiscal 2005, but because they were one-time impacts, he said, Metro deducted the estimated lost ridership from the actual counts for fiscal 2004 and compared the 2005 numbers to the reduced figure.

"We're trying to show the board what's really happening out on the street today," said Metro spokesman George Smalley. "That allowed us to compare real apples to real apples."

But Metro's route changes can't explain why local bus boardings have fallen each year since 1999, dragging overall ridership down with them until fiscal year 2004, when it rose 3 percent.

Archer blames the bus problems largely on construction of MetroRail and transit streets in downtown and Midtown that forced many route changes, which typically cause some riders to fall away. Then came the 9/11 attacks and the Enron debacle, which had sharp impacts on downtown trolley ridership, he said.

Some of Metro's critics accuse the agency of building rail and catering to commuters while shortchanging those who depend on local buses to get to work, the doctor or the grocery store.

"They promised 50 percent more bus routes, but they don't say that. They just say the people voted for rail," said bus rider Mark Smith.

"Metro could have crisscrossed the county with buses for what it will cost to build the rail system."

Metro officials deny they are ignoring local bus riders, noting that these continue to make up 74 percent of the customers. One of these is Dora Villanueva, who got up early Wednesday to catch the 15 Fulton near her home on the near northside.

She transferred downtown to the MetroRail train, then took the 36 Kempwood/Lawndale to reach the business mail company where she stuffs envelopes. The price is right, $2 for a day pass, and the trip takes about an hour.

Villanueva, 57, who does not have a driver's license, said she depends on Metro to earn a living.It's very important, she said: Without the bus, she doesn't work.

Then there's Terrence Wilson, who was paralyzed from the waist down in a motorcycle accident 24 years ago. Wilson, 49, depends on Metro buses and his motorized wheelchair to get around.

A subsidy dilemma

Because many streets in his Acres Homes neighborhood lack sidewalks, Metro built a concrete slab on the shoulder for his wheelchair, he said. But over the years, his regular bus was replaced with a circulating shuttle, and then Metro shortened that route. It no longer passes his home, and Wilson said he now rides his chair in the street for a risky 1 1/2 miles to reach the bus stop.

Archer said Wilson's former route, the 64 Lincoln City Circulator, has kept 85 percent of its riders, despite being shortened, and now has more midday service and a more reliable schedule. It's also a good example of a dilemma that Metro often faces, he said.

"In Acres Homes," Archer said, "the customers are spread out, and because so many are elderly, they don't ride the bus every day."

That adds up to a taxpayer subsidy of $7.61 each time a rider steps on board, Archer said. As a general rule, Metro cuts or changes routes when the subsidy reaches $5.90, he said.

Most of the 37 routes were in similar condition and had been kept going for years despite falling demand, Archer said. He also said Metro classifies some routes in low-income neighborhoods as lifelines and cuts these as lightly as possible.

Metro typically adjusts its bus routes three times a year. Unless there are severe cuts, it is all but impossible to gauge the cumulative effect of a given group of route changes.

However, other Metro statistics show that while ridership was falling, the local buses have continued to travel about the same distance in service each year since 1999.

Bazan reasons that changing so many bus routes to connect with rail had the side effect of inflating the numbers by forcing bus riders to transfer to light rail to reach their destinations.

Because Metro has no practical way to count actual riders, it instead keeps track of boardings — usually expressed on an average weekday basis and counted by electronic devices on buses and trains. A single trip involving transfers, like Villanueva's journey to work, is counted as several boardings.